DOCSLIB.ORG

TABLE E-1 Fractures Treated in the Office Sorted by Frequency* Location of Fracture Number % Number WRVU %WRVU Distal Part of Th

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TABLE E-1 Fractures Treated in the Office Sorted by Frequency* Location of Fracture Number % Number WRVU %WRVU Distal Part of Th TABLE E-1 Fractures Treated in the Office Sorted by Frequency* Location of Fracture Number % Number WRVU %WRVU Distal part of the radius 442 23% 1164 22% Forearm 264 14% 636 12% Tibia 244 13% 783 15% Elbow 189 10% 571 11% Lateral malleolus 152 8% 432 8% Phalanx 116 6% 195 4% Metatarsal 104 5% 208 4% Femur 86 5% 508 10% Humerus 62 3% 186 4% Metacarpal 57 3% 111 2% Clavicle 48 3% 100 2% Other 139 7% 392 7% Total 1903 100% 5286 100% *WRVU = work relative value units. TABLE E-2 Operatively Treated Fractures Sorted by Frequency CPT-Coded Trauma-Related Operations Sorted by Frequency* CPT event Number %number WRVU %WRVU Elbow fracture 201 25.3% 1900 31.8% Tibial fracture 95 12.0% 851 14.2% Femoral fracture 78 9.8% 1177 19.7% Forearm fracture 44 5.5% 326 5.5% Distal radial fracture 40 5.0% 259 4.3% Humeral fracture 17 2.1% 119 2.0% Other fractures 65 8.2% 343 5.7% Irrigation/débridement 105 13.2% 510 8.5% Metal removal 149 18.8% 490 8.2% Total 794 100% 5975 100% *CPT = Current Procedural Terminology, and WRVU = work relative value units. TABLE E-3 Detailed Listing of All CPT-Coded Trauma-Related Operative Events* Totals % Total Fracture Category % of All Trauma CPT Codes Fractures Treated Operatively # units WRVU # units WRVU # units WRVU Percutaneous pinning of supracondylar fracture 124 1198 61.7% 63.1% 15.6% 20.1% Closed manipulation of supracondylar fracture 7 61 3.5% 3.2% 0.9% 1.0% Open reduction of supracondylar fracture 8 83 4.0% 4.4% 1.0% 1.4% Open reduction of supracondylar fracture with joint 2 32 1.0% 1.7% 0.3% 0.5% extension Percutaneous pinning of epicondylar fracture 2 16 1.0% 0.8% 0.3% 0.3% Open reduction of epicondylar fracture 3 32 1.5% 1.7% 0.4% 0.5% Open reduction of lateral/medial condyle fracture 17 197 8.5% 10.4% 2.1% 3.3% Percutaneous pinning of lateral/medial condyle fracture 9 77 4.5% 4.1% 1.1% 1.3% Closed treatment of Monteggia fracture/dislocation, 2 14 1.0% 0.7% 0.3% 0.2% manipulation Closed reduction of radial head/neck fracture 6 26 3.0% 1.4% 0.8% 0.4% Open reduction of radial head/neck fracture 7 56 3.5% 2.9% 0.9% 0.9% Open reduction of olecranon fracture 11 93 5.5% 4.9% 1.4% 1.6% Closed reduction of elbow dislocation 3 15 1.5% 0.8% 0.4% 0.3% Elbow total 201 1900 100.0% 100.0% 25.3% 31.8% Closed reduction of humeral neck fracture 5 25 29.4% 21.0% 0.6% 0.4% Open reduction of humeral neck fracture 3 28 17.6% 23.5% 0.4% 0.5% Closed reduction of humeral shaft fracture 6 30 35.3% 25.2% 0.8% 0.5% Open reduction of humeral shaft fracture 2 24 11.8% 20.2% 0.3% 0.4% IM rod nailing of humeral shaft fracture 1 12 5.9% 10.1% 0.1% 0.2% Humerus total 17 119 100.0% 100.0% 2.1% 2.0% Closed reduction of radial fracture 5 26 11.4% 8.0% 0.6% 0.4% Open reduction of radial fracture 2 18 4.5% 5.5% 0.3% 0.3% Open treatment of ulnar fracture 1 9 2.3% 2.8% 0.1% 0.2% Closed reduction of radial/ulnar fractures 19 106 43.2% 32.5% 2.4% 1.8% Open reduction of both fractures, fix one 3 21 6.8% 6.4% 0.4% 0.4% Open reduction and fixation of both fractures 14 146 31.8% 44.8% 1.8% 2.4% Forearm total 44 326 100.0% 100.0% 5.5% 5.5% Percutaneous pinning of femoral neck fracture 5 60 6.4% 5.1% 0.6% 1.0% ORIF of femoral neck fracture 2 32 2.6% 2.7% 0.3% 0.5% Closed reduction of femoral inter/subtrochanteric fracture 2 24 2.6% 2.0% 0.3% 0.4% ORIF of femoral inter/subtrochanteric fracture 2 32 2.6% 2.7% 0.3% 0.5% Closed reduction of femoral shaft fracture 8 85 10.3% 7.2% 1.0% 1.4% External fixation 3 12 3.8% 1.0% 0.4% 0.2% IM nailing of femoral shaft 48 837 61.5% 71.1% 6.0% 14.0% Percutaneous pinning of distal femoral fracture 4 31 5.1% 2.6% 0.5% 0.5% ORIF of femoral condylar fracture 2 28 2.6% 2.4% 0.3% 0.5% ORIF of femoral supracondylar fracture with joint extension 2 36 2.6% 3.1% 0.3% 0.6% Femur total 78 1177 100.0% 100.0% 9.8% 19.7% Closed reduction of distal radial/ulnar fracture 30 174 75.0% 67.2% 3.8% 2.9% Percutaneous pinning of distal radius/ulna fracture 3 24 7.5% 9.3% 0.4% 0.4% ORIF of distal radial/ulnar fracture 7 61 17.5% 23.6% 0.9% 1.0% Distal radial total 40 259 100.0% 100.0% 5% 4.3% Closed treatment of tibial plateau fracture, manipulation 3 22 3.2% 2.6% 0.4% 0.4% ORIF of unicondylar plateau fracture 8 91 8.4% 10.7% 1.0% 1.5% ORIF of tibial tubercle fracture 7 91 7.4% 10.7% 0.9% 1.5% Closed reduction of tibial shaft fracture 18 104 18.9% 12.2% 2.3% 1.7% Percutaneous pinning of tibial shaft fracture 1 7 1.1% 0.8% 0.1% 0.1% ORIF of tibial shaft fracture 8 93 8.4% 10.9% 1.0% 1.6% IM nailing of tibial shaft fracture 9 123 9.5% 14.5% 1.1% 2.1% External fixation 13 60 13.7% 7.1% 1.6% 1.0% Closed reduction of medial malleolar fracture 3 16 3.2% 1.9% 0.4% 0.3% ORIF of medial malleolar fracture 5 42 5.3% 4.9% 0.6% 0.7% Closed reduction of bimalleolar fracture 2 10 2.1% 1.2% 0.3% 0.2% Open treatment of bimalleolar fracture 1 11 1.1% 1.3% 0.1% 0.2% ORIF of trimalleolar fracture, fix posterior lip 2 26 2.1% 3.1% 0.3% 0.4% Closed reduction of tibial pilon/plafond fracture 5 31 5.3% 3.6% 0.6% 0.5% Open treatment of weight-bearing tibial surface, fix fibula 3 26 3.2% 3.1% 0.4% 0.4% only Open treatment of weight-bearing tibial surface, fix tibia 7 98 7.4% 11.5% 0.9% 1.6% only Tibia total 95 851 100.0% 100.0% 12.0% 14.2% I&D/wound care 105 510 13.2% 8.5% Metal Removal 149 490 18.8% 8.2% Other fractures 65 343 8.2% 5.7% Total 794 5975 100.0% 100.0% *WRVU = work relative value units, CPT = Current Procedural Terminology, IM = intramedullary, ORIF = open reduction and internal fixation, and I&D = irrigation and debridement. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Femoral Shaft Fractures Andrew Chen, MD University of North Carolina
    Femoral Shaft Fractures Andrew Chen, MD University of North Carolina Core Curriculum V5 Disclosure All figures belong to Andrew Chen, MD unless otherwise indicated Core Curriculum V5 Objectives • Review initial management of femoral shaft fractures and possible concomitant injuries • Discuss multiple options with intramedullary nailing • Antegrade/retrograde • Starting point • Reaming • Patient positioning • Understand commonly associated complications Core Curriculum V5 Femoral Shaft Fractures • Bimodal distribution • Young patients after high-energy trauma • Elderly patients after falls from standing secondary to osteopenia/osteoporosis • MVC, MCC, pedestrian struck, fall from height, and gunshot wounds most common mechanisms • Intramedullary nail as “gold standard” treatment, which has continued to evolve since introduction by Gerhard Küntscher around World War II Core Curriculum V5 Anatomy • Largest and strongest bone in body • Anterior bow with radius of curvature ~120 cm1 • Blood supply from primary nutrient vessel through linea aspera and small periosteal vessels • Deformity pattern dependent on attached musculature • Proximal fragment • Flexed (gluteus medius/minimus on greater trochanter) • Abducted (iliopsoas on lesser trochanter) • Distal fragment • Varus (adductors inserting on medial aspect distal femur) • Extension (gastrocnemius attaching on distal aspect of posterior femur) Courtesy of Rockwood and Green’s Fracture in Adults2 Core Curriculum V5 Femur Fracture Classification: AO/OTA • Bone Segment 32 • Type A • Simple •
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Policy Ultrasound Accelerated Fracture Healing Device
    Medical Policy Ultrasound Accelerated Fracture Healing Device Table of Contents Policy: Commercial Coding Information Information Pertaining to All Policies Policy: Medicare Description References Authorization Information Policy History Policy Number: 497 BCBSA Reference Number: 1.01.05 Related Policies Electrical Stimulation of the Spine as an Adjunct to Spinal Fusion Procedures, #498 Electrical Bone Growth Stimulation of the Appendicular Skeleton, #499 Bone Morphogenetic Protein, #097 Policy Commercial Members: Managed Care (HMO and POS), PPO, and Indemnity Members Low-intensity ultrasound treatment may be MEDICALLY NECESSARY when used as an adjunct to conventional management (i.e., closed reduction and cast immobilization) for the treatment of fresh, closed fractures in skeletally mature individuals. Candidates for ultrasound treatment are those at high risk for delayed fracture healing or nonunion. These risk factors may include either locations of fractures or patient comorbidities and include the following: Patient comorbidities: Diabetes, Steroid therapy, Osteoporosis, History of alcoholism, History of smoking. Fracture locations: Jones fracture, Fracture of navicular bone in the wrist (also called the scaphoid), Fracture of metatarsal, Fractures associated with extensive soft tissue or vascular damage. Low-intensity ultrasound treatment may be MEDICALLY NECESSARY as a treatment of delayed union of bones, including delayed union** of previously surgically-treated fractures, and excluding the skull and vertebra. 1 Low-intensity ultrasound treatment may be MEDICALLY NECESSARY as a treatment of fracture nonunions of bones, including nonunion*** of previously surgically-treated fractures, and excluding the skull and vertebra. Other applications of low-intensity ultrasound treatment are INVESTIGATIONAL, including, but not limited to, treatment of congenital pseudarthroses, open fractures, fresh* surgically-treated closed fractures, stress fractures, arthrodesis or failed arthrodesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Combination of Ipsilateral Acetabular Fracture-Dislocation and Pertrochanteric Fracture
    A Case Report & Literature Review Rare Combination of Ipsilateral Acetabular Fracture-Dislocation and Pertrochanteric Fracture Kevin M. Kuhn, CDR, MC, USN, John A. Boudreau, MD, and J. Tracy Watson, MD oral fractures. Other case reports have described acetabular Abstract fracture-dislocations associated with femoral neck fractures.1-3 Acetabular fracture-dislocations are severe This case report describes an acetabular fracture-dislocation injuries that require urgent closed reduction associated with an ipsilateral pertrochanteric fracture and sub- of the hip and often require surgery to restore trochanteric extension. hip stability. Other authors have described We propose a staged treatment strategy consisting of early acetabular fracture-dislocations associated minimally invasive reduction of the hip and delayed reduction with femoral neck fractures, but to our knowl- and fixation of the fractures. This strategy may be useful in edge, this case report is the first to describe an managing a polytraumatized patient who may not be stable acetabular fracture-dislocation in association enough to undergo early definitive management, or a patient with an ipsilateral pertrochanteric fracture and who requires prolonged transfer to receive definitive care. subtrochanteric extension. The patient provided written informed consent for print The polytraumatized patient initially was not and electronic publication of this case report. stable enough for prolonged surgery. Through a 3-cm anterolateral hip incision, a 5-mmAJO Schanz Case Report screw was introduced percutaneously into the A 44-year-old man was involved in a head-on motor vehicle femoral head through the primary fracture site collision at highway speed. He was taken to a local hospital, under fluoroscopic guidance.
    [Show full text]
  • CASE REPORT Injuries Following Segway Personal
    UC Irvine Western Journal of Emergency Medicine: Integrating Emergency Care with Population Health Title Injuries Following Segway Personal Transporter Accidents: Case Report and Review of the Literature Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/37r4387d Journal Western Journal of Emergency Medicine: Integrating Emergency Care with Population Health, 16(5) ISSN 1936-900X Authors Ashurst, John Wagner, Benjamin Publication Date 2015 DOI 10.5811/westjem.2015.7.26549 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 4.0 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California CASE REPORT Injuries Following Segway Personal Transporter Accidents: Case Report and Review of the Literature John Ashurst DO, MSc Conemaugh Memorial Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Benjamin Wagner, DO Johnstown, Pennsylvania Section Editor: Rick A. McPheeters, DO Submission history: Submitted April 20, 2015; Accepted July 9, 2015 Electronically published October 20, 2015 Full text available through open access at http://escholarship.org/uc/uciem_westjem DOI: 10.5811/westjem.2015.7.26549 The Segway® self-balancing personal transporter has been used as a means of transport for sightseeing tourists, military, police and emergency medical personnel. Only recently have reports been published about serious injuries that have been sustained while operating this device. This case describes a 67-year-old male who sustained an oblique fracture of the shaft of the femur while using the Segway® for transportation around his community. We also present a review of the literature. [West J Emerg Med. 2015;16(5):693-695.] INTRODUCTION no parasthesia was noted. In 2001, Dean Kamen developed a self-balancing, zero Radiograph of the right femur demonstrated an oblique emissions personal transportation vehicle, known as the fracture of the proximal shaft of the femur with severe Segway® Personal Transporter (PT).1 The Segway’s® top displacement and angulation (Figure).
    [Show full text]
  • Clinical Efficacy of Extended Modified Posteromedial Approach Versus
    Clinical ecacy of extended modied posteromedial approach versus posterolateral approach for surgical treatment of posterior pilon fracture: a retrospective analysis Qin-Ming Zhang Aliated Hospital of Jining Medical University Hai-Bin Wang Aliated Hospital of Jining Medical University Xiao-Yan Li Aliated Hospital of Jining Medical University Feng-Long Chu Aliated Hospital of Jining Medical University Liang Han Aliated Hospital of Jining Medical University Dong-Mei Li Aliated Hospital of Jining Medical University Bin Wu ( [email protected] ) Alited Hospital of Jining Medical University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3707-0056 Research article Keywords: posterior pilon fracture, approach, fracture xation, buttress plate Posted Date: March 30th, 2020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-19392/v1 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License Page 1/12 Abstract Background: Posterior pilon fracture is a type of ankle fracture associated with poorer treatment results compared to the conventional ankle fracture. This is partly related to the lack of consensus on the classication, approach selection, and internal xation method for this type of fracture. This study aimed to investigate the clinical ecacy of posterolateral approach versus extended modied posteromedial approach for surgical treatment of posterior pilon fracture. Methods: Data of 67 patients with posterior pilon fracture who received xation with a buttress plate between January 2015 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients received steel plate xation through either the posterolateral approach (n = 35, group A) or the extended modied posteromedial approach (n = 32, group B). Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, excellent and good rate of reduction, fracture healing time, American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle- Hindfoot Scale score, and Visual Analogue Scale score were compared between groups A and B.
    [Show full text]
  • Bimalleolar Ankle Fracture Fixation of a 13-Year-Old Patient with Two Activascrew™ LAG Bioabsorbable Screws
    Bimalleolar ankle fracture fixation of a 13-year-old patient with two ActivaScrew™ LAG bioabsorbable screws. Pierre Lascombes Professor, M.D., Ph.D. For medical professional use, not public. © 2020 Bioretec Ltd. and Prof. Lascombes. All rights reserved. Table of Contents Summary Table ........................................................................................................... 3 1 Case Description .................................................................................................. 4 2 Implants and operative technique ......................................................................... 5 3 Outcome ............................................................................................................... 7 4 Contact Information Concerning the Case ............................................................ 8 For medical professional use, not public Page 2 / 8 © 2020 Bioretec Ltd., Prof. Lascombes. All rights reserved. Summary Table Demographics Patient number: P01 Patient Initials: NX Smoking: No Sex: Female Use of alcohol: No Age: 13 Years Systemic disease: No Height: 158 cm Cont. Medication: No Weight: 40 kg Case description Diagnosis: Dislocation right ankle - bimalleolar fracture Cause of injury: Gymnastic injury Operation Operator: Lascombes Operation year: 2016 Note: Immediate reduction of the Operation description: Open reduction of medial malleolus and fixation with TWO resorbable screws dislocation at emergenry room - ketamine. Surgical treatment 5 hours Operation time:h57 min Immobilisation
    [Show full text]
  • Treatment of Common Hip Fractures: Evidence Report/Technology
    This report is based on research conducted by the Minnesota Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. HHSA 290 2007 10064 1). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its content, and do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. No statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The information in this report is intended to help clinicians, employers, policymakers, and others make informed decisions about the provision of health care services. This report is intended as a reference and not as a substitute for clinical judgment. This report may be used, in whole or in part, as the basis for the development of clinical practice guidelines and other quality enhancement tools, or as a basis for reimbursement and coverage policies. AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of such derivative products may not be stated or implied. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment Number 184 Treatment of Common Hip Fractures Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 540 Gaither Road Rockville, MD 20850 www.ahrq.gov Contract No. HHSA 290 2007 10064 1 Prepared by: Minnesota Evidence-based Practice Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota Investigators Mary Butler, Ph.D., M.B.A. Mary Forte, D.C. Robert L. Kane, M.D. Siddharth Joglekar, M.D. Susan J. Duval, Ph.D. Marc Swiontkowski, M.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Femoral Shaft Fracture Fixation and Chest Injury After Polytrauma
    This is an enhanced PDF from The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery The PDF of the article you requested follows this cover page. Femoral Shaft Fracture Fixation and Chest Injury After Polytrauma Lawrence B. Bone and Peter Giannoudis J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:311-317. doi:10.2106/JBJS.J.00334 This information is current as of January 25, 2011 Reprints and Permissions Click here to order reprints or request permission to use material from this article, or locate the article citation on jbjs.org and click on the [Reprints and Permissions] link. Publisher Information The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 20 Pickering Street, Needham, MA 02492-3157 www.jbjs.org 311 COPYRIGHT Ó 2011 BY THE JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY,INCORPORATED Current Concepts Review Femoral Shaft Fracture Fixation and Chest Injury After Polytrauma By Lawrence B. Bone, MD, and Peter Giannoudis, MD, FRCS Thirty years ago, the standard of care for the multiply injured tients with multiple injuries, defined as an ISS of ‡18, and patient with fractures was placement of the fractured limb in a patients with essentially an isolated femoral fracture and an splint or skeletal traction, until the patient was considered stable ISS of <18. Pulmonary complications consisting of ARDS, enough to undergo surgery for fracture fixation1. This led to a pulmonary dysfunction, fat emboli, pulmonary emboli, and number of complications2, such as adult respiratory distress pneumonia were present in 38% (fourteen) of thirty-seven syndrome (ARDS), infection, pneumonia, malunion, non- patients in the late fixation/multiple injuries group and 4% union, and death, particularly when the patient had a high (two) of forty-six in the early fixation/multiple injuries group; Injury Severity Score (ISS)3.
    [Show full text]
  • OUTPATIENT REHABILITATION for a PATIENT FOLLOWING a SURGICALLY STABILIZED TRIMALLEOLAR FRACTURE a Doctoral Project a Comprehensi
    OUTPATIENT REHABILITATION FOR A PATIENT FOLLOWING A SURGICALLY STABILIZED TRIMALLEOLAR FRACTURE A Doctoral Project A Comprehensive Case Analysis Presented to the faculty of the Department of Physical Therapy California State University, Sacramento Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHYSICAL THERAPY by Julie Hammond FALL 2017 © 2017 Julie Hammond ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii OUTPATIENT REHABILITATION FOR A PATIENT FOLLOWING A SURGICALLY STABILIZED TRIMALLEOLAR FRACTURE A Doctoral Project by Julie Hammond Approved by: _____________________________________, Committee Chair Edward Barakatt, PT, PhD _____________________________________, First Reader William Garcia, PT, DPT, OCS, FAAOMPT _____________________________________, Second Reader Rafael Escamilla, PhD, PT, CSCS ____________________________ Date iii Student: Julie Hammond I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format manual, and that this project is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for the project. __________________________________, Department Chair ____________ Michael McKeough, PT, EdD Date Department of Physical Therapy iv Abstract of OUTPATIENT REHABILITATION FOR A PATIENT FOLLOWING A SURGICALLY STABILIZED TRIMALLEOLAR FRACTURE by Julie Hammond A 46 year old woman with a right surgically stabilized trimalleolar fracture was seen for physical therapy treatment for 13 sessions from 06/17/2016 to 09/16/2106 at an outpatient pro bono physical therapy clinic. Treatment was provided by a student physical therapist under the supervision of a licensed physical therapist. The patient was evaluated at the initial encounter with manual muscle test, goniometric measurements, single leg balance test, Timed Up and Go test, and a self- report questionnaire (Foot and Ankle Ability Measure).
    [Show full text]
  • Pulmonary Dysfunction in Patients with Femoral Shaft Fracture Treated with Intramedullary Nailing by BRENT L
    COPYRIGHT © 2001 BY THE JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY, INCORPORATED Pulmonary Dysfunction in Patients with Femoral Shaft Fracture Treated with Intramedullary Nailing BY BRENT L. NORRIS, MD, W. CHRISTOPHER PATTON, MD, JOSEPH N. RUDD JR., BSN, PHD, COLLEEN M. SCHMITT, MD, MHS, AND JEFFREY A. KLINE, MD Investigation performed at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, Chattanooga, Tennessee, and the Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, North Carolina Background: This study was undertaken to determine whether alveolar dead space increases during intramedul- lary nailing of femoral shaft fractures and whether alveolar dead space predicts postoperative pulmonary dysfunc- tion in patients undergoing intramedullary nailing of a femoral shaft fracture. Methods: All patients with a femoral shaft fracture were prospectively enrolled in the study unless there was evi- dence of acute myocardial infarction, shock, or heart failure. Arterial blood gases were measured at three consec- utive time-periods after induction of general anesthesia: before intramedullary nailing and ten and thirty minutes after intramedullary nailing. The end-tidal carbon-dioxide level, minute ventilation, positive end-expiratory pres- sure, and percent of inspired and expired inhalation agent were recorded simultaneously with the blood-gas mea- surement. Postoperatively, all subjects were monitored for evidence of pulmonary dysfunction, defined as the need for mechanical ventilation or supplemental oxygen (at a fraction of inspired oxygen of >40%) in the presence of clinical signs of a respiratory rate of >20 breaths/min or the use of accessory muscles of respiration. Results: Seventy-four patients with a total of eighty femoral shaft fractures completed the study. Fifty fractures (62.5%) underwent nailing after reaming, and thirty fractures (37.5%) underwent nailing with minimal or no ream- ing.
    [Show full text]
  • Bimalleolar Fracture of Ankle Joint Managed by Tension Band Wiring Technique: a Prospective Study Dr
    Scholars Journal of Applied Medical Sciences (SJAMS) ISSN 2320-6691 (Online) Sch. J. App. Med. Sci., 2014; 2(1D):428-432 ISSN 2347-954X (Print) ©Scholars Academic and Scientific Publisher (An International Publisher for Academic and Scientific Resources) www.saspublisher.com Research Article Bimalleolar Fracture of Ankle Joint Managed By Tension Band Wiring Technique: A Prospective Study Dr. Maruthi CV*1, Dr.Venugopal N2, Dr. Nanjundappa HC2, Dr. Siddalinga swamy MK2 1Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, MVJ MC and RH, Hoskote, Bangalore, India 2Professor, Dept of Orthopaedics, MVJ MC and RH, Hoskote, Bangalore, India 3MVJ Medical College & Research Hospital, Hoskote, Bangalore -562 114, India *Corresponding author Dr. Maruthi CV Email: Abstract: Ankle fractures are the most commonly encountered by most of the orthopaedic surgeons. According to the lauge Hansen’s classification five different types can be seen. The surgical treatment of adduction, abduction and supination external rotation type of injuries leading to bimalleolar fractures can be fixed with either tension band technique or cancellous screws. Here we are done a study to evaluate the benefits of tension band wiring technique in the management of bimalleolar fractures of the ankle. In our study, 40 cases of bimalleolar fracture of ankle joint of above mentioned types were admitted in Department of Orthopaedics, between February 2009 and November 2013 was included. We included patients above 20 and below 58 years. We excluded patients with pronation external rotation, vertical compression and trimalleolar fractures, pathological fractures, compound fractures and who are medically unfit and at extremely high anaesthesia risk. All the patients, operated by open reduction and internal fixation using tension band wiring technique.
    [Show full text]
  • Risk Factors for Fracture and Fracture Severity of the Distal Radius and Ankle. What About Osteoporosis, Celiac Disease and Obesity?
    Risk factors for fracture and fracture severity of the distal radius and ankle. What about osteoporosis, celiac disease and obesity? Anja Myhre Hjelle Thesis for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) University of Bergen, Norway 2021 Risk factors for fracture and fracture severity of the distal radius and ankle. What about osteoporosis, celiac disease and obesity? Anja Myhre Hjelle ThesisAvhandling for the for degree graden of philosophiaePhilosophiae doctorDoctor (ph.d (PhD). ) atved the Universitetet University of i BergenBergen Date of defense:2017 17.06.2021 Dato for disputas: 1111 © Copyright Anja Myhre Hjelle The material in this publication is covered by the provisions of the Copyright Act. Year: 2021 Title: Risk factors for fracture and fracture severity of the distal radius and ankle. Name: Anja Myhre Hjelle Print: Skipnes Kommunikasjon / University of Bergen 1 CONTRIBUTORS This work is the result of a collaboration between and funding from The Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care at the University of Bergen, The Department of Rheumatology at the District Hospital of Førde, and The Centre for Health Research in Sogn og Fjordane (a collaborative effort between Førde Health Trust and the health studies department of the Western Norway University College of Applied Sciences). We have also collaborated with The Department of Orthopedic surgery and the Department of Radiology at the District Hospital of Førde, The Departement of Rheumatology at Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, and The KB Jebsen Coeliac Disease Research Centre, University of Oslo. We are grateful for additional funding received from The Norwegian association for Celiac Disease (Norsk Cøliakiforening) in 2012 and 2015.
    [Show full text]